My first job out of college was as an operations manager with a large shipping company. Sure it was an entry-level position but it was management and a good foot in the door of the working world. I had 40 people reporting to me and i handled their time off, payroll, safety training, personal issues and ran a loading dock in a company that never slept. For all the responsibility that came with it, it paid roughly $35,500/yr salaried and the average week was 53 Hrs

That equals around $15/hr.

We can double the minimum wage but the wage for people with college degrees or those who have been working a few years and are starting to push their way through the $teens/hr are all of a sudden going to find that their labor is worth as much as sandwich artists.

o5iiawah:We can double the minimum wage but the wage for people with college degrees or those who have been working a few years and are starting to push their way through the $teens/hr are all of a sudden going to find that their labor is worth as much as sandwich artists.

"We can't raise the minimum wage because than the people who already earning a bit more than it will ask for more!" is a shiatty excuse, and an excuse is all it is.

starsrift:o5iiawah: We can double the minimum wage but the wage for people with college degrees or those who have been working a few years and are starting to push their way through the $teens/hr are all of a sudden going to find that their labor is worth as much as sandwich artists.

"We can't raise the minimum wage because than the people who already earning a bit more than it will ask for more!" is a shiatty excuse, and an excuse is all it is.

I read it more as an observation than an excuse, but I don't find discussion of such things to be offensive.

starsrift:o5iiawah: We can double the minimum wage but the wage for people with college degrees or those who have been working a few years and are starting to push their way through the $teens/hr are all of a sudden going to find that their labor is worth as much as sandwich artists.

"We can't raise the minimum wage because than the people who already earning a bit more than it will ask for more!" is a shiatty excuse, and an excuse is all it is.

FTA:"I've been doing this for 15 years. This is my career. This is what I'm good at," said Shonda Roberts, 38, a cashier at an Oakland KFC.She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

If all you are good at is being a cashier for 15 years at a KFC, then your life choices have sucked or you are just lazy.

84Charlie:FTA:"I've been doing this for 15 years. This is my career. This is what I'm good at," said Shonda Roberts, 38, a cashier at an Oakland KFC.She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

If all you are good at is being a cashier for 15 years at a KFC, then your life choices have sucked or you are just lazy.

She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

This is the part of her comment that should cause the most concern, because "public assistance" means YOUR TAX DOLLARS are subsidizing her, and other workers in low wage positions, instead of being paid a decent wage by her EMPLOYER. To reach the federal poverty level for a family of four, she would need to be paid $11.06/hour. To REACH the federal poverty level.

SuperTramp:84Charlie: FTA:"I've been doing this for 15 years. This is my career. This is what I'm good at," said Shonda Roberts, 38, a cashier at an Oakland KFC.She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

If all you are good at is being a cashier for 15 years at a KFC, then your life choices have sucked or you are just lazy.

She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

This is the part of her comment that should cause the most concern, because "public assistance" means YOUR TAX DOLLARS are subsidizing her, and other workers in low wage positions, instead of being paid a decent wage by her EMPLOYER. To reach the federal poverty level for a family of four, she would need to be paid $11.06/hour. To REACH the federal poverty level.

15 years at a cash register and she's so good at it, her employer won't give her a full time schedule that she says she has asked for? I'm a touch skeptical about that claim. She's so good at it that she's making $8 an hour after 15 years? She hasn't been motivated in all that time to take her exceptional cashier skills to an employer who would at least take her on full time? After 15 years?

15 years at a cash register and she's so good at it, her employer won't give her a full time schedule that she says she has asked for? I'm a touch skeptical about that claim. She's so good at it that she's making $8 an hour after 15 years? She hasn't been motivated in all that time to take her exceptional cashier skills to an employer who would at least take her on full time? After 15 years?

If you're skeptical now about one person's motivation, your head may assplode in the next decade, where it's estimated that 28% of Americans will be working in low wage jobs. Do they all lack motivation? Does every one of the 1 in 4 Americans earning less than $10/hour RIGHT NOW also lack motivation?

SuperTramp:84Charlie: FTA:"I've been doing this for 15 years. This is my career. This is what I'm good at," said Shonda Roberts, 38, a cashier at an Oakland KFC.She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

If all you are good at is being a cashier for 15 years at a KFC, then your life choices have sucked or you are just lazy.

She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

This is the part of her comment that should cause the most concern, because "public assistance" means YOUR TAX DOLLARS are subsidizing her, and other workers in low wage positions, instead of being paid a decent wage by her EMPLOYER. To reach the federal poverty level for a family of four, she would need to be paid $11.06/hour. To REACH the federal poverty level.

So it's the employers job to make sure that pays enough for her to take care of her whole family? What if she had 8 kids? Would the employer then be required to pay $20 an hour?

It ain't the employers fault shes a single mother of 3 kids. It may not be her fault either (the father could have passed away, for instance), but it's certainly not the employers job to take care of her family. It's HER job. If all she's getting is 16 hours a week, then she should be pounding the pavement looking for another position where she can get more hours, or a 2nd job to cover those over 24 hours she isn't working.

15 years at a cash register and she's so good at it, her employer won't give her a full time schedule that she says she has asked for? I'm a touch skeptical about that claim. She's so good at it that she's making $8 an hour after 15 years? She hasn't been motivated in all that time to take her exceptional cashier skills to an employer who would at least take her on full time? After 15 years?

If you're skeptical now about one person's motivation, your head may assplode in the next decade, where it's estimated that 28% of Americans will be working in low wage jobs. Do they all lack motivation? Does every one of the 1 in 4 Americans earning less than $10/hour RIGHT NOW also lack motivation?

Majority of New Jobs Pay Low Wages

I'm not saying we should decide the whole issue based on the woman. I just think she's full of it.

Southern100:SuperTramp: 84Charlie: FTA:"I've been doing this for 15 years. This is my career. This is what I'm good at," said Shonda Roberts, 38, a cashier at an Oakland KFC.She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

If all you are good at is being a cashier for 15 years at a KFC, then your life choices have sucked or you are just lazy.

She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

This is the part of her comment that should cause the most concern, because "public assistance" means YOUR TAX DOLLARS are subsidizing her, and other workers in low wage positions, instead of being paid a decent wage by her EMPLOYER. To reach the federal poverty level for a family of four, she would need to be paid $11.06/hour. To REACH the federal poverty level.

So it's the employers job to make sure that pays enough for her to take care of her whole family? What if she had 8 kids? Would the employer then be required to pay $20 an hour?

It ain't the employers fault shes a single mother of 3 kids. It may not be her fault either (the father could have passed away, for instance), but it's certainly not the employers job to take care of her family. It's HER job. If all she's getting is 16 hours a week, then she should be pounding the pavement looking for another position where she can get more hours, or a 2nd job to cover those over 24 hours she isn't working.

Right, because this woman's hours are sufficiently consistent that she can take a second part-time job with working hours that don't change from week to week. You know, just like all the other people working for employers who pay them low enough that they qualify for public assistance and give them too few hours to qualify for full-time benefits.

Ontos:Can't make it on $8.25 an hour? Then maybe you should acquire some skills and actually become more useful and marketable. You know... like the people that make more than you.

Trouble with that philosophy, from society's viewpoint, is that there will always have to be somebody doing those jobs - the rest of us require them done. If we decide that it is OK to make these people a permanent underclass (even though the individuals involved may rotate out over time) - well, there are costs that come with that decision, too - there is no free lunch.It depends upon the situation, but by and large, the undermining of the working class wage doesn't portend good things in the economic future. It's hard to concoct a meta-economic scenario in which it would. If one adopts the adolescent "f**k you, I've got mine" attitude, that settles the discussion, of course, but at that point one has nothing left to add to the discussion.

I'm not saying we should decide the whole issue based on the woman. I just think she's full of it.

I understand that looking down one's nose at someone living in poverty gives some people a sense of reassurance that they're not at the bottom of the ladder. However, one would be well advised to look up these days, because the upper rungs are being removed by those at the very top -- and they're coming for the one you're standing on, too.

Southern100:SuperTramp: 84Charlie: FTA:"I've been doing this for 15 years. This is my career. This is what I'm good at," said Shonda Roberts, 38, a cashier at an Oakland KFC.She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

If all you are good at is being a cashier for 15 years at a KFC, then your life choices have sucked or you are just lazy.

She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

This is the part of her comment that should cause the most concern, because "public assistance" means YOUR TAX DOLLARS are subsidizing her, and other workers in low wage positions, instead of being paid a decent wage by her EMPLOYER. To reach the federal poverty level for a family of four, she would need to be paid $11.06/hour. To REACH the federal poverty level.

So it's the employers job to make sure that pays enough for her to take care of her whole family? What if she had 8 kids? Would the employer then be required to pay $20 an hour?

It ain't the employers fault shes a single mother of 3 kids. It may not be her fault either (the father could have passed away, for instance), but it's certainly not the employers job to take care of her family. It's HER job. If all she's getting is 16 hours a week, then she should be pounding the pavement looking for another position where she can get more hours, or a 2nd job to cover those over 24 hours she isn't working.

Pay them enough now to break the cycle of poverty, or invest many times that amount on the prison system. Just because you get off on punishing people for "making the wrong choices" doesn't mean it is a good idea.

I mean, why didn't she choose to be born into a stable family, well off enough to have time to care about their children's education? Why didn't they listen to the abstince only sex ed so they didn't have children at 16? why don't they just buy more money?!

gfid:starsrift: o5iiawah: We can double the minimum wage but the wage for people with college degrees or those who have been working a few years and are starting to push their way through the $teens/hr are all of a sudden going to find that their labor is worth as much as sandwich artists.

"We can't raise the minimum wage because than the people who already earning a bit more than it will ask for more!" is a shiatty excuse, and an excuse is all it is.

Raising it to $15 is a ridiculous increase to ask for.

No, it isn't. This is what fixing income inequality looks like. The low guys ask for an increase, and that should ripple up until it hits a soft ceiling where the next tier of jobs and pay per hour shrug and say, "Good for them, I guess".

If your argument is that it's going to ripple up a long way, than that's only a sign that the pay scales have gone to hell in a ham basket and there've been a long series of misteaks.

Southern100:So it's the employers job to make sure that pays enough for her to take care of her whole family? What if she had 8 kids? Would the employer then be required to pay $20 an hour?

Businesses are ALLOWED to exist (by the State) to, in part, serve the public good. Companies don't just spring out of nowhere, someone applies to the government and the government GRANTS them the ability to exist as long as they agree to follow the rules and behave in certain ways. One of those is, at least in principle, that they remain good for the pubic. One could argue that it is the responsibility of businesses to ensure that its employees are not living below the poverty line.

I'd like to see States start revoking corporate charters of companies that no longer serve in the public's interest.

We've had discussions about this before, most recently the "BART people want to make $85K/year for driving a train" threads where half the thread was people biatching about unions and SF's impending bankruptcy, and pointing out that if we didn't have to pay pensions to people who no longer worked we could pay the actual workers more money, and the other half of the thread was people going "Guys, that's really not a lot of money. Yeah, it's $85K/year, but it's $85K in California".

So guess who the fast-food restaurants in Australia are prone to hire? Do you think they're going to hire a 30-year old burger flipper when they can get a 16 or 17 year old one for half the price? And those poor 17 and 18 year olds only making ~$9-$10/hour still have to pay to live in the most expensive country in the world.

So yes, they have a higher minimum wage, but your age pretty much pushes you out of the low-skill jobs - you either move up, or out.

So as you can see, 77% of fast food workers in Australia are under 21, and the large majority (88%) of them spend 3 years of less doing that type work.

This goes back to what I was saying earlier - employers in Australia aren't going to hire 28 year old employees for low-skill jobs like fast food when they can get a 17 year old for half the cost. And when that 176 year old gets to be 19 or 20, they're going to get fired/laid off to be replaced by the next 17 year old.

We need a major raise in the minimum wage. In most of the country, it doesn't need to be quite $15 but it should be at least $12. What we need worse is a worker's bill of rights. It should be mandatory that you get your two days off in a row. It should be mandatory that shifts be at least 12 hours apart. It should be illegal to call someone in to work and then cut their hours later in the week. It should be illegal to change a posted schedule. It should be illegal, unless a need can be shown, to schedule someone radically different shifts every week. It should be illegal to make an employee buy their own branded uniform. It should be mandatory for employers to provide one uniform shirt per day worked each week. Basically, all this bullshiat that you guys would never put up with from a normal job should be illegal.

So basically - Table 1 is saying 96% of fast food workers make more money in Australia than in the US. Yet the price of the combo meal is about the same in Australia as in the US. Yes it's expensive to live in Australia, but New York city isn't exactly cheap.

I don't think you guys with "real jobs" quite understand the things minimum wage workers put up with. Every single day there's some insulting bullshiat that would make you engineers, code monkeys, and analysts punch your boss in the teeth and walk out. Now, imagine that every tech job out there was like that.

Southern100:his goes back to what I was saying earlier - employers in Australia aren't going to hire 28 year old employees for low-skill jobs like fast food when they can get a 17 year old for half the cost

That's why people under the age of 18 make up 5% of the fast food work force?Your own source betrays you.

Sure, these are entry-level jobs that usually pay corresponding wages. The thing is, all those job creators I've been hearing so much about over the last few years don't seem to be creating anything else other than those entry-level jobs for people to advance out of. The job creators shoudn't be surprised when those employees then take more aggressive measures to improve their lot.

SuperT:Southern100: SuperTramp: 84Charlie: FTA:"I've been doing this for 15 years. This is my career. This is what I'm good at," said Shonda Roberts, 38, a cashier at an Oakland KFC.She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

If all you are good at is being a cashier for 15 years at a KFC, then your life choices have sucked or you are just lazy.

She said works about 16 hours a week for $8 per hour, despite asking for a full-time schedule. With three children, she said she relies on public assistance to make ends meet.

This is the part of her comment that should cause the most concern, because "public assistance" means YOUR TAX DOLLARS are subsidizing her, and other workers in low wage positions, instead of being paid a decent wage by her EMPLOYER. To reach the federal poverty level for a family of four, she would need to be paid $11.06/hour. To REACH the federal poverty level.

So it's the employers job to make sure that pays enough for her to take care of her whole family? What if she had 8 kids? Would the employer then be required to pay $20 an hour?

It ain't the employers fault shes a single mother of 3 kids. It may not be her fault either (the father could have passed away, for instance), but it's certainly not the employers job to take care of her family. It's HER job. If all she's getting is 16 hours a week, then she should be pounding the pavement looking for another position where she can get more hours, or a 2nd job to cover those over 24 hours she isn't working.

Pay them enough now to break the cycle of poverty, or invest many times that amount on the prison system. Just because you get off on punishing people for "making the wrong choices" doesn't mean it is a good idea.

I mean, why didn't she choose to be born into a stable family, well off enough to have time to care about their children's education? Why didn't they liste ...

It sure sounds to me like she actually chose to be a cashier for 15 years. She says it is her career. People that don't want to do the job and want something better don't talk about being a cashier as a career.

Tobin_Lam:It sure sounds to me like she actually chose to be a cashier for 15 years. She says it is her career. People that don't want to do the job and want something better don't talk about being a cashier as a career.

You've already lost the argument if your point of contention is word interpretation. Just give up.

Tobin_Lam:It sure sounds to me like she actually chose to be a cashier for 15 years. She says it is her career. People that don't want to do the job and want something better don't talk about being a cashier as a career.

Yeah, because she had plenty of free time and money that she could have put toward training for another career. Why didn't she just ask her nanny or her family to watch and provide for her kid during that time. Hell, why didn't she just ask her parents to buy her a fast food place?

stiletto_the_wise:Southern100: So it's the employers job to make sure that pays enough for her to take care of her whole family? What if she had 8 kids? Would the employer then be required to pay $20 an hour?

Businesses are ALLOWED to exist (by the State) to, in part, serve the public good. Companies don't just spring out of nowhere, someone applies to the government and the government GRANTS them the ability to exist as long as they agree to follow the rules and behave in certain ways. One of those is, at least in principle, that they remain good for the pubic. One could argue that it is the responsibility of businesses to ensure that its employees are not living below the poverty line.

I'd like to see States start revoking corporate charters of companies that no longer serve in the public's interest.

It's not going to happen. End of story. You can be as "understanding" of these sub-100 IQ day laborers all you like. You can spend all day telling us we need to be "compassionate". Wake up and smell the french fries.

84Charlie:stiletto_the_wise: Southern100: So it's the employers job to make sure that pays enough for her to take care of her whole family? What if she had 8 kids? Would the employer then be required to pay $20 an hour?

Businesses are ALLOWED to exist (by the State) to, in part, serve the public good. Companies don't just spring out of nowhere, someone applies to the government and the government GRANTS them the ability to exist as long as they agree to follow the rules and behave in certain ways. One of those is, at least in principle, that they remain good for the pubic. One could argue that it is the responsibility of businesses to ensure that its employees are not living below the poverty line.

I'd like to see States start revoking corporate charters of companies that no longer serve in the public's interest.

It's not going to happen. End of story. You can be as "understanding" of these sub-100 IQ day laborers all you like. You can spend all day telling us we need to be "compassionate". Wake up and smell the french fries.

i'm sure he'll wake up just before you wake up to the french haircuts and the realization that there are a lot more of those "sub-100 IQ day laborers" than the moneyed elite, there's not that much of an IQ test to operate a knife or even a gun, and they're more than a little peeved at the prospect of their kids having a worse existence then their own while the rich's biggest worry is what color of private plane to purchase this season.

So, people who make minimum wage and want it doubled have no concept of economics? Well, color me shocked.

Let's see, if you start paying someone $15 an hour to flip a burger, here's what's going to happen: A lot of people in middle-management jobs are going to say, "Hey, I can make $30K a year - which isn't much less than I'm making now - and have a job that doesn't require a brain or require me to work 60 hours a week." So, they start applying for jobs. The next thing you know, Mr. Stoner Bugger Flipper who doesn't give a crap about his job, suddenly finds himself with reduced hours or none at all, because if McDonald's is forced to pay premium wages, it's going to look for premium people.

Or, Mr. Middle Manager says, "WTF, boss, I'm now making the same as the pothead in the drive-thru at Taco Bell, either start paying me more or I'm gone." So every big and small business then has to start raising wages to put a buffer between what's left of the middle class and the lower-case workers who have to have $2,000 rims and $750 cellphones.

You know what happens when wages go up across the board; a little thing called inflation kicks in. Suddenly, everyone is forced to start paying more for goods, businesses included, and the economy either comes to screeching halt or it cost s$1,000,000 for a loaf of bread (see ZImbabwe). Soon, no one has a job (see Zimbabwe again).

And if that extreme scenario doesn't happen, then at best, interest rates rise, the economy slows down, people get laid off, they quit eating out -- period -- so all of a sudden, the lowest worker on the totem pole is out on the streets!

Dear people who earn minimum wage and want to earn more: develop some skills and get a job somewhere else. You earn minimum wage because that is what you have done with your life, the minimum and that is all you are worth. I pay all of my employees over $20/hr + benefits. Because they're worth it, and I won't hire anyone who isn't.

NewWorldDan:Dear people who earn minimum wage and want to earn more: develop some skills and get a job somewhere else. You earn minimum wage because that is what you have done with your life, the minimum and that is all you are worth. I pay all of my employees over $20/hr + benefits. Because they're worth it, and I won't hire anyone who isn't.

Seems like they are developing some skills -- community activism and labor organization. Just wait until they unlock the political activism achievement.

TopoGigo:I don't think you guys with "real jobs" quite understand the things minimum wage workers put up with. Every single day there's some insulting bullshiat that would make you engineers, code monkeys, and analysts punch your boss in the teeth and walk out. Now, imagine that every tech job out there was like that.

When I was in high school and college, I had plenty of shiatty jobs like that. You know how I got out of it?

I worked my ass off, showed up on time and got good references because I didn't want to spend my life like that.

I advise you to do the same. Nobody owes you more money for your mere existence.

pueblonative:i'm sure he'll wake up just before you wake up to the french haircuts and the realization that there are a lot more of those "sub-100 IQ day laborers" than the moneyed elite, there's not that much of an IQ test to operate a knife or even a gun, and they're more than a little peeved at the prospect of their kids having a worse existence then their own while the rich's biggest worry is what color of private plane to purchase this season.

Are those day laborers, who the democrats claim they most represent, the reason liberals want to ban guns? It'll be kind of hard to have a revolution if the masses are disarmed.